Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19638646›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2009

Cytological surveillance compared with immediate referral for colposcopy in management of women with low grade cervical abnormalities: multicentre randomised controlled trial.

TOMBOLA Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02749110 (Participation in Screening for Cervical Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02749110 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2016, after this paper: background citation

Participation in Screening for Cervical Cancer: Interest of a Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Self-sampling Device Provided by the General Practitioner; a Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, LilleRan2016 to 2021Enrolled308ConditionsMalignant Tumor of Cervix, Cervical Intraepithelial NeoplasiaArmsVaginal self-sampling brush
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Strategies to improve retention in randomised trials.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

TOMBOLA Group
University of Ottawa · CA

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU1Medical Research Council G9700808
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine the effectiveness of cytological surveillance in primary care compared with immediate referral for colposcopic examination in women with low grade abnormal results on cervical cytology tests.

designMulticentre individually randomised controlled trial.

settingNHS cervical screening programmes in Grampian, Tayside, and Nottingham.

participants4439 women, aged 20-59, with a cytology result showing borderline nuclear abnormalities or mild dyskaryosis, October 1999-October 2002.

interventionsCytological screening every six months in primary care (n=2223) or referral for colposcopy and related interventions (n=2216). All women were followed for three years, concluding with an exit appointment at which colposcopic examination was undertaken. Colposcopists assessing outcome at this appointment were blinded to randomisation.

main outcome measuresPrimary end point: cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or more severe disease. Other end points: cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III or worse, clinically significant anxiety and depression, other self reported after effects, and rates of non-attendance. Analysis was by intention to treat; all those randomised were included.

resultsThe cumulative incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse was 79 per 1000 person years in the colposcopy arm and 58 per 1000 person years in the cytological surveillance arm (relative risk 1.37, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.57). This difference was less marked for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade III or more severe disease, but the incidence was still higher in the colposcopy arm (relative risk 1.26, 1.04 to 1.53). Among women randomised to immediate colposcopy, 79% (74.9% to 82.5%) of cases of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse were diagnosed at the time of the immediate colposcopy, while among women randomised to cytological surveillance, 77% (72.1% to 81.2%) of cases were detected by surveillance cytology and related interventions. Similar proportions of women were anxious or depressed in the two arms. A higher proportion of women in the colposcopy arm reported after effects, and these were of longer duration and more severe. Non-attendance was low in both arms.

conclusionThe more marked difference between the arms in the occurrence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse than in the occurrence of grade III or worse can probably be accounted for by the spontaneous regression of some cases of grade II neoplasia. Compared with cytological surveillance, a policy of immediate colposcopy detects more cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade II or worse, and some more grade III or worse, but might lead to overtreatment. Such a policy is associated with a higher rate of reported after effects, which are more severe and of longer duration than those associated with cytological surveillance.

trial registrationISRCTN 34841617.

Indexed as

ColposcopyAdultAnxietyDepressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMass ScreeningMiddle AgedQuality Assurance, Health CareReferral and ConsultationUterine Cervical DysplasiaUterine Cervical NeoplasmsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID19638646
PMCPMC2718083
OpenAlexW2123070859

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.